- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
Question for those who've read Dorian Johnson's testimony
Posted on 11/25/14 at 3:54 pm
Posted on 11/25/14 at 3:54 pm
Did you feel that the questioner was, at times, asking questions in a way to highlight his inconsistencies? Do you feel that was appropriate?
4
Posted on 11/25/14 at 3:56 pm to baybeefeetz
quote:
Did you feel that the questioner was, at times, asking questions in a way to highlight his inconsistencies? Do you feel that was appropriate?
I haven't read his, but I noticed them doing the same thing to Darren Wilson.
I'm an attorney and I have some experience with this. Of course they are going to do that, because they are well aware that Johnson was lying his arse off.
Posted on 11/25/14 at 3:58 pm to baybeefeetz
What if the prosecutor knew without a doubt he was innocent based on all evidence? What if he knew he would be caught later with his pants down with this witness?
What if he knew he at least had to bring it to grand jury or it would be worse?
What if he knew he at least had to bring it to grand jury or it would be worse?
This post was edited on 11/25/14 at 3:59 pm
Posted on 11/25/14 at 4:00 pm to baybeefeetz
quote:Not in a Grand Jury situation. It was like presenting evidence but only a defense attorney was present.
Did you feel that the questioner was, at times, asking questions in a way to highlight his inconsistencies? Do you feel that was appropriate?
There was no scrutiny given to the testimony of statements favorable to Darren Wilson, including his own. In a real trial a prosecutor would question his testimony in many places. There would also be dash cam video to review and I haven't seen a report on what he said to the officer on the first day (might be in there, but I haven't found it). Also, there is no way a normal person would be given a clean car to drive back to the station in all by himself. Or would be allowed to enter the SUV and check things / remove keys by himself.
Posted on 11/25/14 at 4:01 pm to baybeefeetz
Why did it take 4 hours to walk to store and back? Did Dorian's old lady ever get her breakfast?
Posted on 11/25/14 at 4:02 pm to lsu13lsu
quote:Then he should decline to prosecute. Not present evidence in the worst light possible. Especially with his personal history, someone else should have been in charge.
What if the prosecutor knew without a doubt he was innocent based on all evidence? What if he knew he would be caught later with his pants down with this witness?
What if he knew he at least had to bring it to grand jury or it would be worse?
Posted on 11/25/14 at 4:02 pm to lsu13lsu
It's pretty obvious McCulloch didn't want this to go to trial.
Posted on 11/25/14 at 4:03 pm to lsu13lsu
quote:I hear you.
What if the prosecutor knew without a doubt he was innocent based on all evidence? What if he knew he would be caught later with his pants down with this witness? What if he knew he at least had to bring it to grand jury or it would be worse?
Posted on 11/25/14 at 4:05 pm to mmcgrath
quote:
Then he should decline to prosecute. Not present evidence in the worst light possible. Especially with his personal history, someone else should have been in charge.
If he declined to prosecute knowing Wilson was completely innocent then would this be all on his shoulders?
What about now isn't it on many people's shoulders? Even a jury of his peers?
Page 1 of 1
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News